PDA

View Full Version : In reaction to Got Lead's thread on BB guns being drawn...


Epyon
August 7, 2006, 11:16 AM
Got Lead started this thread: http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=176810

Which got me thinking about something. Now a more difficult question I must ask, if you DON'T KNOW whether that is a BB gun/airsoft gun or not, what would you do if say some kid drew on you? Take age into consideration please, suppose the scenarios were an elementary school student, a middle school student, and a high school student what would you do in each of those cases? Treat each scenario as if there were no way out/extremely difficult to back out, I know this is going to be diffcult but I'd rather address this to get an idea and hope to get some insight from this and yes it is a tough call, but I'd rather talk it out now than deliberate if such a freak scenario were to happen to me or anyone else out there. If anyone in LE could also comment and give some advice that would be much appreciated as well, especially if you've had experience in such situations.


Epyon

garryc
August 7, 2006, 11:25 AM
While I'm not a street cop I'd say my mind would register weapon first and I would act on that. Perhaps moving on the draw would give me time to recognize the weapon for what it is, then maybe not. I would not expect anyone to go beyond a pattern recognition. In my job, if an inmate I'm handeling pulls a toothbrush out of his pocket he's going down. I will not take the time to see if that toothbrush has a razor blade imbedded in it or if it's sharpened.
That being said, investigators and people on juries see the incident in hindsight. I would expect them to say you should have taken the time to better decern the threat. Of course taking that time might get you killed.
I'm sure in my senario I would be disiplined because the talking heads can only see hindsight.

Raptor5191
August 7, 2006, 12:56 PM
This happens on a semi-regular basis actually.

The first thing people must understand is that the teenager can pull that trigger and kill you just as easily as the 40 year old perolee. Younger than early teens...probably will buy you a bit more time to react.

Having said that, you should immediately try to get cover while giving short, direct, and loud commands. IE: "I see the gun in your hand! DROP IT NOW!"; "Do NOT point that weapon in my direction! If you do, you will force me to shoot you!", etc.

By doing those things you get the kids attention, everyone in the area can hear that you see the threat, are reacting to the threat, and are giving clear, loud, and concise commands to avoid injuring the person with the weapon.

Regrettably, if the threat seems to be of adult size and seems to have the drop on you with appears to be a firearm, reacting with deadly force is the normal answer. Trying to decide if that barrel of the 92F you are staring down is 6 or 9mm at 25 feet in shadows and/or low light is a good way to get yourself sent home in a box.

springmom
August 7, 2006, 02:53 PM
Here's what happened in Houston this weekend. Notice what the weapon in the story was:

http://www.click2houston.com/news/9637892/detail.html

Imagine...you're in the Waffle House and some jackass comes in and robs the place WITH A PELLET GUN :eek: They were fortunate, I guess, that no CHL was in there. Idjits. Total idjits.

Springmom

Epyon
August 7, 2006, 09:28 PM
Obviously if grown men were robbing others and it gave me time to prepare, I would definately take them down as quick as I can, obviously I'd have to make sure I got a clear shot as in no one in the line of fire in front of or behind my target. Regardless of whether or not it was a pellet gun, I'd probably be under too much stress to even bother identifying it as a pellet gun.


Epyon

bclark1
August 8, 2006, 08:23 AM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/custom/newsroom/chi-060808teen-shot,1,4140573.story?coll=chi-news-hed

not necessarily 100% on-topic, but timely.
i believe the officers that the boy was pointing at them. it's unfortunate that there is such an inbred mistrust of authority that people feel compelled to lie to erode support for the officers.

i don't have an answer for a canned response. it's entirely situational. if i knew it's a pellet gun, there's no way i'm coming back at someone with a centerfire, but in the event of the unknown i don't feel this is a case where an instinctual response is the wisest.

Glenn E. Meyer
August 8, 2006, 09:57 AM
There is no yes or no answer in such decision making. Gun folks like yes or no rules but the world is more complex.

It depends on:

1. How much do you value the individual that you will shoot?
2. How much trouble will you get into if you shoot that individual?
3. How to 2 and 3 interact with your perceived risk?

Each factor will have a weight and feed into an evaluation that produces a value that will have to cross a criterion line for a specific action.

What if your teenage daughter gets mad at you and picks up your Daisy and points it at you? You are carrying your Springfield XD in 45 ACP with Federal Atomic HP 500 Gr Blastos. Do you hose her? As compared to some teenager mugger who stops you in a dark alley with a clearly identified pellet gun?

Shoot them all!!! Or what?

threegun
August 8, 2006, 10:58 AM
Glenn,

As compared to some teenager mugger who stops you in a dark alley with a clearly identified pellet gun?


Would you apply deadly force to a thug armed with a pellet gun?

bclark1
August 8, 2006, 12:50 PM
no, run or resist. if i shoot my odds of a life ending are very great. if he shoots and i'm moving or hitting him the odds of me taking a pellet to the temple or eye are very slim. you have a responsibility to prevent the loss of life when possible.

razorburn
August 8, 2006, 04:14 PM
Well, assuming it's not easily identifiable, such as if we see the kid pumping it up or loading it, I would draw and be ready to fire. Age won't be a consideration, sorry. I'm 21 and still got a lot of life left too, thanks, and I'm not an idiot delinquent who runs around drawing toy guns on people. Of course if at any point I recognize the gun as a bb gun, I'll reholster, cover my eyes and just start kicking kid butt. The odds of being seriously wounded by a pellet gun are even smaller than being seriously wounded by someone throwing rocks or sticks, and basically trivial.

azurefly
August 8, 2006, 06:37 PM
no, run or resist. if i shoot my odds of a life ending are very great. if he shoots and i'm moving or hitting him the odds of me taking a pellet to the temple or eye are very slim. you have a responsibility to prevent the loss of life when possible.


Once again, we are back to, "Why is it a big deal to a law-abiding citizen that the life of a criminal attacker may have to end in order to safeguard the life of the law-abiding citizen?"

Sure, I've never taken a life before, so I can't say 100% how I'd feel if I ever did. But at this moment, I don't think that I'd be likely to feel terribly bad about having to end the life of someone who threatened mine.

I don't care about the "odds" of me taking a pellet to the temple; that is not exclusively what I'm going to use to consider my course of action. I am much more concerned about the ramifications of getting hit, which could include anything from a painful, infected wound, to loss of vision or loss of life.

The "odds" of me needing the fire extinguisher in my house are not very high, but I still have it. The same goes for the odds of needing my seat belt to save me in a car crash. I wear the seat belt because of HOW BAD the results could be for me if I didn't. By your standard, one might say I had wasted the time and effort by wearing my seatbelt on every car trip since about 1983 or so, because I've never been in a crash where it saved my life or kept me from suffering a grievous injury.

Forget about odds, I want to know about potential for seriously harmful effects, even if the odds are 1 in 100,000.

-azurefly

azurefly
August 8, 2006, 06:42 PM
The odds of being seriously wounded by a pellet gun are even smaller than being seriously wounded by someone throwing rocks or sticks, and basically trivial.

Trivial? You are mistaking the ODDS being "trivial" with the important fact that the POSSIBLE RAMIFICATIONS of you hitting those odds being FAR from trivial.

The odds ("likelihood") of winning Lotto are "trivial." But for the person who hits all six numbers, the situation is far from trivial.

The likelihood of being hit in the eye by the pellet may be "trivial," but if you are the guy who does get hit in the eye, you won't think the issue was so trivial then.

I would act accordingly. Many here would, also. You appear to be saying that you would not. Fine.


-azurefly

Capt Charlie
August 8, 2006, 08:28 PM
Sure, I've never taken a life before, so I can't say 100% how I'd feel if I ever did. But at this moment, I don't think that I'd be likely to feel terribly bad about having to end the life of someone who threatened mine.
I recommend you read "On Killing" (http://www.killology.com/killrev.htm), by Col. David Grossman, Azurefly. It's a real eye-opener ;) .

Heist
August 8, 2006, 08:39 PM
Grossman is a hack in many areas, though. Take his writings with a grain of salt and an eye for sifting out chaff.

razorburn
August 9, 2006, 01:23 AM
Trivial? You are mistaking the ODDS being "trivial" with the important fact that the POSSIBLE RAMIFICATIONS of you hitting those odds being FAR from trivial.

The odds ("likelihood") of winning Lotto are "trivial." But for the person who hits all six numbers, the situation is far from trivial.

The likelihood of being hit in the eye by the pellet may be "trivial," but if you are the guy who does get hit in the eye, you won't think the issue was so trivial then.

I would act accordingly. Many here would, also. You appear to be saying that you would not. Fine.


-azurefly

Yeah? Well there are many hundreds of billions of things that while possible, the trivial odds of them occuring are simply are not worth considering due to the steps needed to avoid them. It's a risk to reward ratio. You could also lose your eyeball standing at a sidewalk when a pebble gets kicked up by a rock. But I'm not going to don full face protection to go for a walk with my dog. More people die each year choking on a burger, struck by a freak lightning storms, hell people die from spontaneous human combustion.

"THE POSSIBLE RAMIFICATIONS OF HITTING THOSE ODDS ARE FAR FROM TRIVIAL!" right? :rolleyes:

So by your foolhardy logic, we should all liquefy our food in a blender before consumption, drape ourselves with rubber whenever we head out, and invoke voodoo witchcraft to protect ourselves from these threats respectively.

Cover your eyes with your arms when a kid is shooting his toy gun at you, and you'll already have "acted accordingly" by rendering his weapon incapable of giving you more than a small welt. :rolleyes: You can then strip him of his bb gun or turn and leave the situation. Drawing and firing on the kid is an obscenely excessive use of force.


This is as clear to me as it is to any court of law. Someone who chooses a course of action as grave as the slaying of another, in a situation like this where they are not even presented with a high likelihood of injury- much less death, is abhorrent and only looking to satisfy their personal bloodlust and desire to kill. When you yourself acknowledge that the odds of receiving serious injury from a bb gun attack is miniscule, but use the statement "but even though they're tiny, the odds were still there" is obviously and plainly an extremely, extremely poor and terrible defense for killing, and any court or remotely rational person is going to agree.

Do you seriously think that telling a court or any rational people that though you were extremely, extremely unlikely to suffer even a real injury, you are justified in shooting a kid because there was still a tiny chance he could hurt you is going to justify homicide??
I would not draw on a kid with a bb gun, but I would have no qualms drawing on a fellow CCW who points his weapon at a kid with a BB gun.

azurefly
August 9, 2006, 02:04 AM
I have decided for myself that discussing this further with you is quite pointless. You won't acknowledge a variety of facts, not least of which are that one does not have to prove that grievous bodily harm was likely, only that you were threatened with it. You also won't acknowledge that not every airgun is weak and impotently powered like a Marksman spring-loaded "1911" -- or that people HAVE DIED or BEEN BLINDED by BBgun wounds.

Arguing this with you is pointless.
Do what you want.


-azurefly

razorburn
August 9, 2006, 05:49 AM
You retract only because your poor argument fell apart under scrutiny and you don't wish to further embarass yourself. Should I point out the part where you yourself admitted that death/serious injury by bb gun is unlikely?

The likelihood of being hit in the eye by the pellet may be "trivial," but if you are the guy who does get hit in the eye, you won't think the issue was so trivial then.

Or should I further expose your weak logic?

Here you compare buckling seat belts and having fire extinguishers to drawing against a bb-gun wielding child, where you again admit you acknowledge the odds are unlikely but say you do it just in case?

The "odds" of me needing the fire extinguisher in my house are not very high, but I still have it. The same goes for the odds of needing my seat belt to save me in a car crash. I wear the seat belt because of HOW BAD the results could be for me if I didn't. By your standard, one might say I had wasted the time and effort by wearing my seatbelt on every car trip since about 1983 or so, because I've never been in a crash where it saved my life or kept me from suffering a grievous injury.

This is one of the most foolish and faulty comparisons I have ever read. Does it not cross your feeble mind that the only price you must pay for playing "just in case" in a seat belt/fire extinguisher situation even though you're against the odds for buckling your seat belt or having a fire extinguisher is merely a brief moment of time and effort, and whereas the price paid for "just in case" in this situation is taking a human life?!

You honestly don't see how something like that is different?! You don't see how taking 20 seconds of your time to buckle up for "just in case" and flat out killing somebody for "just in case" is different??!! If you cannot grasp such a simple concept you are clearly completely unfit for CCW and society.


And here you say

You also won't acknowledge that not every airgun is weak and impotently powered like a Marksman spring-loaded "1911" -- or that people HAVE DIED or BEEN BLINDED by BBgun wounds

Yes, of course I acknowledged that. In fact, in the other thread I calculated out energy figures and showed that the most powerful conventional high dollar pellet guns are still not even 10% the power of a .22short and extremely unlikely to cause serious injury with your face shielded. BB guns are even weaker being unable to create a good seal between rifling and projectile. It justifies nothing. As quoted in the other thread, the figures from 1990-2000 were 4 or 5 deaths annually mostly to kids under 15. Did you acknowledge that many more people HAVE DIED or BEEN BLINDED by freak lightning and solid foods? Should we drape ourselves in rubber and liquify all our foods in order to be safe? :rolleyes:

Please, as a teen I was once an extremely frequent airgun forum poster as well, since the days of airgunletter. I know there are some powerful PCP airguns coming up on .45 acp power, but they are very large, extremely rare, highly expensive, semi-custom big bore single shot rifles and look remotely like anything we'd id as the typical toy bb gun.

Almost every statement you've made so far has been near absurd. It's been almost a constant showcase of your logical fallacies. If you want to try to give a flippant response out to save grace, or for me to continue your intellectual skewering, then that's fine too.

Capt Charlie
August 9, 2006, 12:50 PM
Folks, this thread is quickly heading down the same road as the original BB thread I had to close.

Please.... step back, and count to ten before you post.

azurefly
August 9, 2006, 01:52 PM
Wise words, Capt. Charlie.

Look, I don't recall having out-and-out thrown insults in this thread. I'm assailing what I see as faulty logic, not personalities or intelligence.

And, actually, I'm not getting into it again with razorburn. The trouble and acrimony make it not worthwhile.

I'm still trying to imagine, though, how anyone could take what I've said on this subject and then regurgitate it in such a flawed manner. I did not describe a 9-year-old boy aiming a weak Marksman bb pistol. I thought the issue we were discussing ran more toward a hostile actor using a gun that may or may not be a bb gun. And yes, I acknowledge that even if I knew it to be a bb gun, I may well consider drawing on the assailant because this situation is about more than the chance of a RANDOM shot from a bb gun blinding me, it's about the potential for an AIMED shot by a HOSTILE person coming in the direction of my face and eyes. The fact that the shot may be aimed to cause damage ups the "odds" of harm being done.

But, whatever.

-azurefly

teejhot.40cal
August 9, 2006, 03:46 PM
I haven't read this whole thread but in Penn. where I live, a weapon can be used if ur in fear of ur own life or someone elses. My dad (ex state trooper) and i had this conversation. If the weapon at hand is a BB or airsoft gun and u don't know, ur legally allowed to protect yourself. If you just drawn and fire (not implying that anyone would ever do that) and it turns out to be a BB gun your legally ok, but ur going to feel like crap. He said to tell them that you have a weapon and draw it on them INDEX YOUR FINGER. More then likely they will listen unless that have a problem like drugs or drunk.

cpaspr
August 9, 2006, 03:58 PM
What do you mean by "draw it on them INDEX YOUR FINGER" ?

Raptor5191
August 9, 2006, 04:09 PM
LOL...Are you saying point a gun at them and flip them off?

prater
August 9, 2006, 04:55 PM
This may apply, I found through some research I did awhile back that in alot of OISs(officer involved shootings), suspects end up being shot in the hands. This comes from the fact that officers are so focused on the weapon more so than the person that they end up firing at the weapon and not the person. This may affect how they percieve the individual holding the weapon. Personally Age would play a factor, but only a small one, if its obviously a young child (under 12) I would probably not perceive them as a threat, but from 13 to 18 its very hard to tell and teens these days can be the most dangerous people alive. It would all depend on the circumstances.

azurefly
August 9, 2006, 06:48 PM
but from 13 to 18 its very hard to tell and teens these days can be the most dangerous people alive. It would all depend on the circumstances.


Very true, and a large part of the reason I would be on high alert to the threat.

I'm not willing to be dismissive just because someone appears to be young. Kid down here was 13 years old when he shot his English teacher in the face, right there in the classroom, and killed him. (Nathaniel Brazill -- shot Barry Grunow, several years ago here in Florida)

I'm also not willing to be dismissive of the threat that a bb gun (or anything else that can fire a projectile) poses to my safety and vision. I already mentioned that I'm a private pilot and a skydiver, and on occasion a shooter. I need my vision intact for all those things, and my life would change drastically if something damaged it.

I think it's juvenile to go all hyperbolic on this subject and talk about death by solid food, lightning, and spontaneous human combustion. Those are things you can't really affect: you have to eat, lightning strikes randomly... A kid or an adult pointing a gun of any type at me is going to receive a gun-type response. No, I'm not going to go outdoors in a rubber suit and a helmet just because a car could kick up a rock, but that's FAR from the potential I face to be harmed by someone who is engaged in deliberate actions.


-azurefly

razorburn
August 9, 2006, 07:33 PM
Wise words, Capt. Charlie.

Look, I don't recall having out-and-out thrown insults in this thread. I'm assailing what I see as faulty logic, not personalities or intelligence.

And, actually, I'm not getting into it again with razorburn. The trouble and acrimony make it not worthwhile.

I'm still trying to imagine, though, how anyone could take what I've said on this subject and then regurgitate it in such a flawed manner.

They were exact quotes.

I did not describe a 9-year-old boy aiming a weak Marksman bb pistol. I thought the issue we were discussing ran more toward a hostile actor using a gun that may or may not be a bb gun.

Don't try to change the subject. You picked out the part of my original statement about how I'm against drawing if I knew it was a bb gun. This is an attempt at a concession and relating to a completely different situation when I have overwhelmingly showed you you were wrong. You started this, I'm finishing it. The situation of being unsure which type the gun is, is not what we were just discussing. You were talking about someone you knew was holding a bb gun. I could find a dozen more of your quotes to support this. In fact, you reassert this on the next statement.

And yes, I acknowledge that even if I knew it to be a bb gun, I may well consider drawing on the assailant because this situation is about more than the chance of a RANDOM shot from a bb gun blinding me, it's about the potential for an AIMED shot by a HOSTILE person coming in the direction of my face and eyes. The fact that the shot may be aimed to cause damage ups the "odds" of harm being done.

Again, you choose to ignore that you don't have to stand there. COVER YOUR EYES AND FACE and the risk of an eyeball shot drops down to ZERO This is clearly a logical and obvious solution. Or even simpler, turn around so he can't hit your eyeballs and just then leave. Then even his DELIBERATE actions don't put you in any great danger.

I think it's juvenile to go all hyperbolic on this subject and talk about death by solid food, lightning, and spontaneous human combustion.Those are things you can't really affect: you have to eat, lightning strikes randomly...

The food analogy is spot on. You have to eat, but don't have to eat solid foods. By liquifying them in a blender you reduce that already minute chance that you'll choke on the solid food.

I am not at all dismissive because of the shooters age, and as I said in my first statement, I'd definately draw if the gun in question was not identifiable as a bb gun.

But we've established several times the obvious fact that the risk of death or serious injury from a BB is extremely small. I can quote you several times on that. You keep going back to circular logic "But the risk is still there, even though its small" "Even though the risk is small, we still buckle up, etc.."
Yes, we buckle up just in case because all it takes to get that little bit of precaution is a pittance of effort and time. This isn't some little movement, it's killing somebody. If you had to kill someone each time for you to buckle up, its obviously wrong and nobody would do it. If I can destroy your arguments for shooting someone you knew was armed with a bb gun this completely, how do you think a professional prosecutor will do?

Just to reiterate, if not sure what the weapon is and you're threatened, yes, draw and shoot. If you know it's a bb gun, its appalling to shoot.

444
August 9, 2006, 07:50 PM
Sorry, but I didn't read all the previous posts so I hope I am not repeating anything.
First of all let's realize that you could be seriously hurt or even killed with a BB or pellet pistol. So, we are talking about the threat of at least serious bodily harm. As Ralphie well knows, you can put an eye out with even the cheapest BB gun. That is a HUGE permenent disability.
Second, the age of the person holding it doesn't matter. A six year old can kill you just as dead as an adult. I have seen a number of people killed by young children. Mostly by accident: kids playing with loaded guns. The victims were just as dead as if shot by Bonnie and Clyde.

Now, my answer: if the situation occured in perfect circumstances where I had at least a split second with a clear view of the gun, in good light and the gun was obviously an air gun, I would hesitate to shoot dispite the danger. Some airguns are obviously airguns. Guns that you have to pump up like a Benjamn/Sheridan LOOK like airguns. If there was any doubt in my mind I would shoot.


FWIW, I have seen at least two persons shot by police officers who were brandishing airguns (I work as a paramedic).

threegun
August 10, 2006, 09:44 AM
Guys I originally thought that I could just cover my eyes as Razor stated and the threat is gone. Having thought this through further (thanks to this thread and Azurefly) and assuming that it is a teen aged thug attempting some type of forcible felony, I would be forced to apply deadly force. Covering my eyes in the face of an assailant is tactically insane for starters. If I have done my job my gun should be blazing before the recognition of gun type is made anyway.

Something similar happen to me a my job. A customer armed with a bb gun pulled it from under his jacket (ala shoulder holster area) and pointed it at a coworker. In this case I didn't fire because I recognized the gun as a bb gun in time. The gun was not pointed at me however so no immediate danger was focused at me. I was behind a counter and with a coworker so the danger of being assaulted by the thug while covering my eyes was nil.

I don't want to kill someone over a bbgun. But this isn't doing that as I now think of it. It is killing someone to protect yourself from a potentially deadly threat that they imposed upon you against your will. They can take a chance with their own lives not mine. Thanks TFL and Azurefly. I have corrected a flaw in my thinking that could have caused me to make a very bad decision.

razorburn
August 10, 2006, 09:11 PM
^ in that situation, it's the threat of being physically attacked by fists and kicks than the bb gun. That does warrant deadly force if the guy is a physically superior specimen. If it's some kid who can't physically beat you down, armed with just a bb gun, then covering your eyes will be just fine.


In either situation a obvious solution is simply to just turn around and leave, at most being annoyed by the feeling of little bbs bouncing off your back as you go.


Just about any object hitting the eye will destroy it, and just about any object has killed people. If you just got a ccw for the sake of rampaging about looking for an excuse to kill someone, the flawed argument for shooting a kid wielding kid you know to be armed with a bb gun can also be used against kids with slingshots, pencils, crayons, paper airplanes, etc, all of which will put out an eye or kill you....

The real reason anybody wants to shoot a recognized bb gun wielding kid, is simply anger at the notion that someone has the rude impudence to harass them.

Epyon
August 10, 2006, 10:30 PM
It seems this is a rehash of Got Lead's BB gun thread, this wasn't about whether or not you could identify it as a BB gun, just a kid (of the varying age brackets I listed.) drawing on you, and you don't know if it's a BB gun or a real one.


Epyon

bclark1
August 11, 2006, 09:06 AM
not to go back a ways, but you have to play odds. it's life. you're not a cop, you don't have to play vigilante, and you're going to have an immeasurable burden of proof to put forth when you shoot. i am all for stopping criminals at any phase in their "careers" in their tracks. but i justify my former response here with that your odds of ending up in jail or absolutely destitute from a civil suit are much higher than your odds of comparable physical damage, which i would define as loss of hearing, vision or worse. by responding to an airgun with a firearm, you tip the scale in terms of force disparity. you have the right to defend yourself in kind, fight fire with fire, and by doing that you'll always be in the right and should expect exoneration from blame. but no matter how much some punk kid has it coming, when you go from 0 to 100 responding with deadly force, you're risking your freedom and livelihood, which are what we are trying to protect. and you inadvertantly risk that of your fellow gunners too, because every dumb kid that gets himself shot is more fuel in the anti's fire.

threegun
August 11, 2006, 10:47 AM
If it's some kid who can't physically beat you down, armed with just a bb gun, then covering your eyes will be just fine.


Once your eyes are covered or back is turned, who's to say the bb gun doesn't become a blunt force instrument? How about a knife being pulled since the fake gun didn't work. The "little thug" didn't pull the bb gun to scare you, he has intentions. I have to accept responsibilities for my actions and so will they. Unfortunately I cannot allow another to place me in this kind of danger. My children want daddy to come home every night. If I can avoid shooting by covering up and withdrawing of course I will. If bb gun boy advances he's a goner.

Epyon
August 12, 2006, 12:16 AM
Though your words are valid, it's kind of like preaching to the choir. However, I would still like to see some real answers from everyone on what you'd do if you encountered youngsters at varying ages and they draw an UNIDENTIFIABLE OBJECT THAT LOOKS LIKE A FIREARM! In this scenario you don't have any escape route/extremely difficult escape route.


Epyon


P.S: I'm trying to keep this thread on topic.

oldbillthundercheif
August 12, 2006, 12:21 AM
And read "On Killing"

It's not entirely relevant to this discussion, but would be an eye-opener to a lot of couch-commandos.

Dang good book that's spot on about human reactions in bad situations...

Raptor5191
August 12, 2006, 10:20 AM
Epyon: See my original response.

Epyon
August 12, 2006, 10:25 AM
I did read your response to this thread's question, I do like what you had to say. Makes plenty of sense.


Epyon

PythonGuy
August 12, 2006, 10:58 AM
To add some real life to this thread, we just had a robbery here on Long Island in a town called Brentwood with 3 misfits pulling a BB gun on several different people, robbing them. They were 19 and 20 years olds and hopefully will go to jail for a long time, although they usually get out even worse criminals. There is no carry here in Long Island unless you are a LEO, but if these guys robbed an off-duty officer and got shot, its their fault and they get what they deserve. The only reason they used a BB gun was because they couldn't get their hands on a real one. I don't think that 3 or 4 guys carrying guns is a good time for a CCW holder to pull his gun and challange, a man's got to know his limitations as a "famous" movie cop once said. Its a tough problem with no easy answer, "Dirty Harry" only exists in the movies, not real life......

springmom
August 12, 2006, 01:01 PM
I don't think that 3 or 4 guys carrying guns is a good time for a CCW holder to pull his gun and challange, a man's got to know his limitations as a "famous" movie cop once said. Its a tough problem with no easy answer, "Dirty Harry" only exists in the movies, not real life......

This is the most sensible thing in this thread. And I would add, if I was up against 3 or 4 guys, I don't care if all they had were catcher's mitts, I'd consider myself (arthritic slow-moving babushka that I am) in DEEP doo-doo.

Thanks for the reality check, Pythonguy.

Springmom

Epyon
August 12, 2006, 10:34 PM
Sorry if I was vague, I never meant as in multiple attackers, I meant one on one against each of the age limits I listed.


Epyon

P.S: I saw the movie Empire Records today and in that movie there's a scene where a 15 year old boy is holding up a music store with a revolver firing it wildly. It turns out the revolver only had blanks in it, however in a situation like that after seeing that movie, it made me think if I really had no way to escape, I didn't know if the gun had blanks or whatever, and it boiled down to protecting me or my girlfriend, I guess I'd have no choice then.

bclark1
August 12, 2006, 11:56 PM
i said if it's unidentifiable, it'd be entirely situational. it's really a moot point. i'm not going to say "always shoot." if it's someone who looks dangerous, maybe. if it's some half-pint teenager, i'd probably hesitate and hope i had the nerve to talk them down. i might get myself killed if they were serious and had a real gun. but i'll never land myself in prison or tarnish the reputations of the people i care about and the gun good guys.

all these ideas go out the window once it really happens though. interesting point of debate, but there's no right answer, and i'm trying to serve as a counterweight on the bb-earns-a-bullet mentality, because i worry that conclusions made in topics like these are easily taken out of context and can earn us a bad rep.

razorburn
August 13, 2006, 05:33 AM
Once your eyes are covered or back is turned, who's to say the bb gun doesn't become a blunt force instrument? How about a knife being pulled since the fake gun didn't work. The "little thug" didn't pull the bb gun to scare you, he has intentions. I have to accept responsibilities for my actions and so will they. Unfortunately I cannot allow another to place me in this kind of danger. My children want daddy to come home every night. If I can avoid shooting by covering up and withdrawing of course I will. If bb gun boy advances he's a goner.

You don't think he pulled it to scare you? Of course he did! What use is a bb gun for anything else in a crime, other than the fact that it can look like a real gun? In terms of firepower, it's about the same as a rubber band slingshot, and much less deadly than pretty much anything else around, a sharp stick, a pipe, a wrench, etc. If it's a weak young kid as I said, his use of it as a blunt instrument will not take you down. You'll still hear him coming, especially if you just turn around and leave, since he'll have to run to catch you. If it's a kid, he'll be much smaller than you and probably won't catch you on his short legs no matter what. If the threat of an empty-handed physical attack justifies shooting, then shoot. But the bb gun should not have any effect itself on the decision.

All the wannabe Ralphie killers seem to want to ignore this extremely simple solution. Just turn around and leave. At worst, the feeling of bbs bouncing off your backside will annoy you.

Please, don't cheapen your family by using them as an emotional throwback to try and justify something this absurd. How'd you like it if next time you were at a pediatricians office, someone shot one of your kids for pointing a rubber band at him? After all, it could've put his eye out too!

It's just those pompous bitter people who are angry and indignant that someone would dare harass them, and so search for a rationalization to kill them. It's wrong, it's sick, and it's twisted.

Kids have been shooting at each other with BB guns since they were invented. I've been shot at by a bb gun. Hundreds of times. And you know what? I'm still alive, which is apparently a miracle according to some posters, since apparently I should've killed my friends to have had any chance of that. If you and your friends had bb guns when you were kids, you probably have been too. Getting shot at by a BB gun is having your life or health at extreme danger. It's not a good enough reason to warrant killing someone.

threegun
August 13, 2006, 09:07 AM
Razorburn, You are way out of line buddy.
For starters I'm neither bitter nor pompous. Nor am I angry, indignant or looking to kill. How about laying off the name calling.

What I am is realistic. I understand that a teen aged bad guy pointing a bb gun at me in a dark alley is not simply trying to scare me as I pointed out already. He is attempting to use it as a tool to achieve a goal which is a force-able felony of some type probably robbery. I will treat this threat as listed above. If the thug advances while I'm covering my eyes he's a goner.

Please, don't cheapen your family by using them as an emotional throwback to try and justify something this absurd. How'd you like it if next time you were at a pediatricians office, someone shot one of your kids for pointing a rubber band at him? After all, it could've put his eye out too!


Your mind is so closed that you fail to see the difference in a teen pointing a bbgun at you and a teen pointing one at you in an attempt to rob you. Then you compare it to rubber bands get real man.

You would have us turn our backs to a robber and call me absurd LOL.
BTW let my 10 year old whack you on the head with a metal bb gun. Might allow you to see the light.

Epyon
August 13, 2006, 11:56 AM
BTW let my 10 year old whack you on the head with a metal bb gun. Might allow you to see the light.

Or maybe see stars?:D :D :D


Epyon

Doubletaptap
August 14, 2006, 12:40 AM
This is a hard decision I hope i never have to make.
If you did blast the guy with the pellet or bb gun-and those airsofts look real too!!
The anti-gunners would have a field day!!!

razorburn
August 14, 2006, 05:52 AM
Razorburn, You are way out of line buddy.
For starters I'm neither bitter nor pompous. Nor am I angry, indignant or looking to kill. How about laying off the name calling.

What I am is realistic. I understand that a teen aged bad guy pointing a bb gun at me in a dark alley is not simply trying to scare me as I pointed out already. He is attempting to use it as a tool to achieve a goal which is a force-able felony of some type probably robbery. I will treat this threat as listed above. If the thug advances while I'm covering my eyes he's a goner.


Quote:
Please, don't cheapen your family by using them as an emotional throwback to try and justify something this absurd. How'd you like it if next time you were at a pediatricians office, someone shot one of your kids for pointing a rubber band at him? After all, it could've put his eye out too!



Your mind is so closed that you fail to see the difference in a teen pointing a bbgun at you and a teen pointing one at you in an attempt to rob you. Then you compare it to rubber bands get real man.

You would have us turn our backs to a robber and call me absurd LOL.
BTW let my 10 year old whack you on the head with a metal bb gun. Might allow you to see the light.

The manner in which he chooses to use this "tool", is as a tool to scare you. Not a tool to kill or maim you, since any imbecile knows a toy gun that can't even break skin or draw blood is not going to be effective to that use. It is about as dangerous as a rubber band, in that all its capable of is eye damage with an eyeball shot.

99% of the bb pistols out there are made of mostly plastic and weigh not much more than 1 lb. You think having a 10 year old hit you on the head with that is a threat to your life? It would hurt of course, but not kill you. And then I could easily overpower, take his gun, and lay a serious ass-kicking on your kid once he's in that close.

As stated before, if you fear for your life if the robber did not have the bb gun, then it's justified to shoot. In that case, its not the bb gun. The bb gun changes nothing and gives absolutely no leverage for being a justified shoot.

If it's a kid who you wouldn't shoot if he was trying to rob you unarmed, then you can just run away. He's not likely to be able to keep up. You can get in a car and just drive off. Get inside some kind of room, and just hold the door closed. There's a near infinite number of options. Killing the kid you know has just a bb gun is a disgusting show of disregard for human life, as well as extremely unlikely to play out well in court.

I mean, just look at what's happened in our discussion so far. You've already lost the life-endangering-bb gun-threat argument with the the massive showing of the hundreds of millions of kids shooting each other with bb guns and experiences of those who've had them in their youth and been shot countless times; so now you're on shaky ground, backpeddling on that and trying to bolster your argument by jumping to conclusions about contrived "intentions". He's now a robber, I guess, in your mind.

Firstly, it's not in either of the original posts which were simply about being drawn on by bb guns, you're now just making up additional dimensions to the argument.. But either way, a news search shows that bb gun shootings are typically harassment and not some malicious prelude to getting out a real weapon and killing. Okay, playing based on those new guidelines, if it is a robber who you consider to be a lifethreatening danger even without any detectable weapons, then yes, I'd support drawing.

threegun
August 14, 2006, 01:52 PM
Razorburn, so now you're on shaky ground, backpeddling on that and trying to bolster your argument by jumping to conclusions about contrived "intentions". He's now a robber, I guess, in your mind.


I am referring to the post by Glenn Meyer What if your teenage daughter gets mad at you and picks up your Daisy and points it at you? You are carrying your Springfield XD in 45 ACP with Federal Atomic HP 500 Gr Blastos. Do you hose her? As compared to some teenager mugger who stops you in a dark alley with a clearly identified pellet gun?

I changed nothing. Clearly here I wouldn't shoot a teen playfully (however stupid) pointing a bbgun at me. The mugger comparison is what I have been referring to.

The use of the BBgun in an attempted force able felony is as a tool to scare you into compliance. If this fails (once you turn your back to retreat this threat is gone) you are still left with an assailant armed with a blunt object or possibly more that you haven't seen yet who has bad intentions. It simply isn't smart to respond by turning your back. Even covering the eyes could disadvantage you to defend against further attack.

Next you claim that BBguns cannot cause blunt trauma to you. I can only disagree by saying that many bbguns are solid enough to cause significant damage depending on the violence of the attack. Some including the crossman dart shooting bbgun (which was used in my bbgun episode) will cause serious damage or death if used as a blunt force tool. This however is but one possibility once you have committed tactical suicide by giving an aggressor your back.

Again I am talking about a teen aged mugger intent on robbery or worst not some idiot teen prankster that you keep confusing. Several times I stated that if covering up and withdrawling safely was possible thats the course I would take. If not allowed to do so safely he's a goner.

Anthony2
August 14, 2006, 05:01 PM
For all thoise interested....A pellet gun can kill a person.

At the age of 9 a friend of mine was shooting birds in his backyard, which overlooks a car wash. After shooting at two or three and missing, he lost interest and put the pellet gun away...(blasted babysitter was asleep)

Much to his shock and amazement, one of the pellets made it through the trees in the backyard and entered the vicinity of the car wash. At that young age and having no concept of ballistics, he had assumed the trees would stop his pellets.

Where did the pellet go? Across the car wash and into the eye of a young
(30ish) mother.:( While she did not die immediately, she did unfortunately die before reaching the hospital due to internal bleeding.

This event although tragic did serve as a catalyst. From that day on all the area schools have had a firearms safety course available free of charge for any child with a consenting parent. :D
AND
My family, that of the child, and that of the victim...have developed zero tolerance policy on firearms handling, one that I still hold to 'til this day.

That and we have some of the best marksmen I've ever met...:rolleyes:

Back to the original topic, I would hope either I or the police would beat the daylights out of anyone stupid enough to use a pellet gun (or any firearm) in that manner....I agree with other posters that the response would be entirely situationally conditional....

Consider this: If the situation were instead in your home, would you take the time to determine the caliber of firearm of an intruder? I seriously doubt it.
More likely than not, most of us if in an inescapeable situation wouldn't take the time to think about it...we would react the same as if confronted with a 9mm or 45 acp.....

Just my thoughts on the matter....:cool:

threegun
August 14, 2006, 05:56 PM
Anthony, Thanks. While a few "supermen" on this thread believe differently, most, including you and I, understand that a bbgun can kill. While a youth I killed many creatures with handgun bb and pellet pistols from pumps to co2's. Game rabbit sized was achievable if range and shot placement were ideal. Having field dressed many rabbits I understand the penetration capabilities. There is no doubt in my mind that an eyeball shot could be deadly even at pistol velocities

PS Razorburn, I, as you suggested, have been shot many times as a child and dumb adolescent with a bb/pellet rifle and I can tell you right now that it hurt way more than a rubberband. Including one time that my friend had to pinch the bb out of my leg.........looked like a mini geyser of blood.

azurefly
August 14, 2006, 06:08 PM
Guys I originally thought that I could just cover my eyes as Razor stated and the threat is gone. Having thought this through further (thanks to this thread and Azurefly) and assuming that it is a teen aged thug attempting some type of forcible felony, I would be forced to apply deadly force. Covering my eyes in the face of an assailant is tactically insane for starters. If I have done my job my gun should be blazing before the recognition of gun type is made anyway.


Glad my words helped you come to an understanding.

You and others have noted (correctly) that covering one's face (eyes) in the presence of a direct threat is just ludicrous. I would certainly want to check the training and credentials of anyone who suggests that shielding one's attacker from one's sight is a recommended course of action.

razorburn casually leaves out the fact that there are airguns out there that could penetrate enough flesh to perforate an intestine, mutilate the genitals, etc. And just because "it's only a bb gun," he advocates that we are cold-blooded murderer-wannabes if we say that we'd seriously consider shooting the assailant armed with a bb gun.


Threegun, your posts just keep getting better and better. Keep it up.

Regarding razorburn's posts, they keep degenerating into character assassination and name-calling. It's not worth responding to them; and he's continually exposing how out-of-touch with reality he is on this subject. Comparing criminal intent that's combined with a potentially weapon, against a rubber band in a pediatrician's office, indeed! :rolleyes:


-azurefly

riverkeeper
August 14, 2006, 07:04 PM
Edit--the scenario indicates that the weapon appears to be real. The assumption reasonably can then be that it is and that we are legitimately in fear of bodily harm/death.

If I KNEW it was a BB gun my response below would be different if only one gun person was involved. End of edit

To some extent my responses depend on both the kid's age and situational environment...is it negative (gangish, hostile looks, night, harsh words, aggressive body postures, aggressive approach, how close) OR is it a more ambiguous or positive environment?

I do NOT KNOW FOR SURE with the elementary age what I would do BUT in all but negative environments they might get a break unless they're with a really rowdy group .... I hope I'd challenge, charge &/or run quickly to cover and draw and proceed wisely. They've made their choice then I will make mine...Darwin decides.

With older kids in either a negative or ambiguous environment it might start a game of Hardball with Hollowpoints. They've made their choice then I make mine...Darwin decides.

threegun
August 15, 2006, 09:07 AM
Azure,

Glad my words helped you come to an understanding.

Thanks, me too. Thats why I love this site. Gets you thinking about things in advance thereby reducing the chances of getting hurt because you hesitated.

razorburn
August 16, 2006, 04:40 PM
No, I've posted several times with specific energy figures about the ballistics of bb and pellet guns. Some pellet guns are powerful enough to match into low level firearms, but they are very expensive, rare, semicustom single shot rifles. The typical bbguns can kill under very unlikely circumstances, just like a rock, a stick, a pen, or just about any other object. For a bb gun, it's like threatening a 100 ton whale. a .22 could kill a hundred-thousand pound whale with a perfect eyeball shot, but it's unreasonable to expect to combat one with a .22. Facing such inadequate weaponry, it'd be very easy to just leave, which is what I'd do. I would not shoot a kid armed with just a bb gun.

threegun
August 16, 2006, 05:10 PM
I would not shoot a kid armed with just a bb gun.

Good for you. I wouldn't either if and thats a big IF I was allowed to retreat while protecting my "soft spots". If allowed to safely retreat, meaning no advancing on me by the "kid", my gun stays quietly pointed in his direction. If he advances, yep you guessed it, he's a goner.

The moral of the story should be don't put someone elses life at risk and expect not to be shot. Lots of things aren't considered deadly yet kill people. Something as benign as a single left hook has killed thousands of people. Am I the next rare case? I choose not to take that chance. One thing is for sure........the bb gun armed kid can guarantee 100 percent not to be shot by me if he simply leaves me alone. If he chooses to play Russian roulette with our lives he might not like the outcome.

cpaspr
August 16, 2006, 06:26 PM
which was: " . . .if you DON'T KNOW whether that is a BB gun/airsoft gun or not, what would you do if say some kid drew on you? Take age into consideration please, suppose the scenarios were an elementary school student, a middle school student, and a high school student what would you do in each of those cases? Treat each scenario as if there were no way out/extremely difficult to back out, . . ."

I take "DON'T KNOW" to mean it probably looks real. Which means I'd probably draw while seeking cover since escape is not an option, order them to "DROP THE GUN NOW!". If cover is available, then I'd probably hold off shooting unless they ignored the order and proceeded to raise the gun and intentionally aim at me. At that point, they have demonstrated a total disregard for their risky behavior and the value of a human life, albeit their own, and I would probably shoot, rather than risk finding out the hard way that they don't actually have only a BB gun.

Unfortunately, the age of the kid is fairly irrelevant. Yeah, I'd be sick about it, but I didn't start the situation, the kid did.

azurefly
August 16, 2006, 07:45 PM
The moral of the story should be don't put someone elses life at risk and expect not to be shot. Lots of things aren't considered deadly yet kill people. Something as benign as a single left hook has killed thousands of people. Am I the next rare case? I choose not to take that chance.

More eminently reasonable input from threegun. Thank you.


The fact is, the law allows me to use deadly force if I believe I am threatened with "grievous bodily harm or death," and various legal definitions of "grievous bodily harm" that I have read refer to the loss or permanent impairment of a bodily organ (this could mean an eye, a tongue, a kidney, a lung...)

In order to be legally upheld for shooting someone who had a bb gun and was clearly intending to shoot you with it (or the threat that he would shoot you is clear to a "reasonable person"), one need not feel threatened with DEATH from that bb gun in order to legally shoot to end the threat.

Some here express that they would have serious compunctions about firing (or even drawing) if the assailant were a "kid." I live in an area where a 13-year-old "kid" shot his supposedly "favorite" English teacher in the face, killing him. Although he used a .25 cheapo semi-auto, it still goes toward showing what "kids" these days are capable of.


I won't take it lightly if doing so means my own peril, "sorry."


-azurefly

threegun
August 16, 2006, 08:11 PM
Cpa, In this case I believe the situation depends on what caused the child to draw on me. Was it a dumb joke? Is the kid mad? What is the kid saying? etc. Beyond that I can promise you that the last thing you want is to give my 7 and 10 years olds a free shot at you so age is of little importance in the lethality of the shooter.

http://thumbp1.mail.mud.yahoo.com/tn?sid=2348040506&mid=AFHJjkQAALDHROO77AHE5mj4eVA&partid=3&f=312&fid=Inbox Ryan age 7 Walther p22 (hits the black with most shots @ 10 yards)

http://thumbp1.mail.mud.yahoo.com/tn?sid=2348040506&mid=AODIjkQAADfUROO9Kwgf%2fDFikLE&partid=2&f=312&fid=Inbox Chuckie age 10 also shooting Walther p22 (hits the black with every shot @ 10 yards)

cpaspr
August 16, 2006, 09:37 PM
Threegun -

Sorry, links won't allow viewing.

Notice I said, I'd probably hold off shooting if cover was available. If not, then when that barrel swings my way, mine's already going on target. My responsibility to my family is to try and come home every night. If some dipstick kid is going to go around pointing a real-looking BB gun at people, then he's got to assume some of those people are going to assume it is real. If he picks the wrong person, meaning someone who can shoot back, well - Darwin wins.
__________________

Razorburn -

I understand and agree with you regarding if you know it is a BB gun. Just leave. Even if you have to go through the kid. But the original premise of the scenario was that you don't know it's a BB gun.

threegun
August 17, 2006, 09:45 AM
Cpa,
My responsibility to my family is to try and come home every night.

You did it now buddy, ole Razorburn's gonna give you the tongue lashing of a lifetime like this
originally posted by razorburnPlease, don't cheapen your family by using them as an emotional throwback to try and justify something this absurd. How'd you like it if next time you were at a pediatricians office, someone shot one of your kids for pointing a rubber band at him? After all, it could've put his eye out too!


All I said was my kids want daddy home every nite.

My children want daddy to come home every night.

Good post BTW and I agree totally. I'll try the picts again.



http://thumbp1.mail.mud.yahoo.com/tn?sid=2348040506&mid=AFHJjkQAALDHROO77AHE5mj4eVA&partid=3&f=312&fid=Inbox



http://thumbp1.mail.mud.yahoo.com/tn?sid=2348040506&mid=AODIjkQAADfUROO9Kwgf%2fDFikLE&partid=2&f=312&fid=Inbox

Raptor5191
August 17, 2006, 09:57 AM
This is why I stepped out of this thread. I said my piece and do not care to argue ridiculous statements.

All I can say is that I obviously never got to go home in a box. So, I guess my decision-making ability and training when facing down a gun (no matter what the hell you think it is) has paid off.

riverkeeper
August 17, 2006, 10:18 AM
Teenagers do dumb stuff that could've killed people but results in ONLY great bodily harm + doofus judge at sentencing says, 'I shouldn't be doing this, but I'm going to'. He's right about that.


http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/08/17/deerdecoy.crash.ap/index.html

azurefly
August 17, 2006, 06:15 PM
That crap is sickening.

One victim has brain damage, and the other had a broken neck, vertebrae and more... and all they get is a slap on the wrist, and a judge who sympathizes with them that they'll miss out on playing some football?! :mad:

Why the hell should anyone be surprised that kids do the sickening criminal things they do?! OUR SOCIETY PERMITS IT AND REFUSES TO ADEQUATELY PUNISH IT!


-azurefly

GeorgeF
August 29, 2006, 10:57 AM
Back in 1995 I was able to get my hands on the detailed statistics of all crime committed in PA. One of the sections was thorough breakdown of all firearms used - down to the make of the firearm.

BB guns killed as many people as Uzis did - that is to say 'One.' Uzi was of course the Uzi Carbine, not the full auto SMG. But it just goes to show you, it can happen - even with a BB gun.

Axion
September 5, 2006, 03:56 AM
The moral of the story should be don't put someone elses life at risk and expect not to be shot. Lots of things aren't considered deadly yet kill people. Something as benign as a single left hook has killed thousands of people. Am I the next rare case? I choose not to take that chance

The one big problem I see with this logic is that it's not going to hold up in a court of law. If you shoot someone because you thought they were going to punch you and "a left hook can kill people and you didn't want to take the chance" you're more likely then not going to be in jail for quite a long time. I'd rather take my chances getting punched in the head, then facing a DA for shooting somone that was going to punch me.

Now if the guy is 280lbs and talking about how he's gonna kill me that might change my mind.

Glenn E. Meyer
September 5, 2006, 09:31 AM
Show them a clip from Fight Science on the Discovery channel of a boxer punching you in the head. That's convincing.

Axion
September 5, 2006, 08:13 PM
Show them a clip from Fight Science on the Discovery channel of a boxer punching you in the head. That's convincing.

Sure you might be able to convince a jury that you feared for your life when mike tyson came after you with his fists, but against a more average opponent I don't think it'd work out so well.